As indecision about how to boost the capital city's drinking water supply dragged on for decades, another community 520 miles southeast of Springfield was also awaiting a reservoir.

While it took 30 years to plan and build Lake McIntosh near Peachtree City, Georgia, that lake came into use in 2013. In Springfield, meanwhile, the proposed backup water supply, dubbed Hunter Lake, just last month got a fresh endorsement from the city council and, after 50 years of discussion and debate, is still awaiting permits.

That half-century of starts and stops has resulted in an increasing cost, with the latest estimate putting the price tag at $108 million, up from $76.7 million in 2005. And if the project does come to fruition, City Water, Light and Power customers could face a rate increase of 50 percent or more.

And while city officials are hopeful that Hunter Lake may finally become a reality, the permitting agencies will ultimately determine if and when the project moves forward in earnest. The proposal also faces its share of opposition from members of the public and one alderman.

** See images from a historic structure on the Hunter Lake property **

Springfield city officials hope that the recent approvals of Lake McIntosh and others elsewhere in the country and recent droughts will trigger the permitting agencies, including the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to view the Hunter Lake application with more urgency.

"The droughts in the Southeast, the droughts out West — people see the need for supplemental water supplies," said Ted Meckes, water division manager for Springfield-owned utility CWLP. "And we feel that the Corps, the EPA are going to be more apt to approve permits because of that."

The Springfield City Council voted 9-1 in July to endorse Hunter Lake as a supplement to the city's current drinking water source, Lake Springfield, which state water officials have twice labeled "inadequate" to withstand a severe drought. The city announced Friday that it had reached an agreement with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources for the agency to oversee recreational access and manage wildlife habitats at the site. They signed the agreement Saturday at Conservation World at the Illinois State Fair.

But the city still has a number of obstacles to get past in order to see the second lake built.

"We've made it this far a number of times," Mayor Jim Langfelder said. "We're going to put this on the fast track and try to move in that direction."

Langfelder and Meckes hope the permits can be secured in 12 to 18 months. When it comes to financing the projects, including through possible rate hikes, Langfelder said he would likely hold meetings in each of the city's 10 wards to promote the proposal.

Engineering firms city leaders have consulted have said the lake could be completed in about six years, allowing about two years for a design phase and two years for construction.

Permitting process

Hunter Lake requires major permits from three different agencies. The Army Corps of Engineers permit, for dredging and filling the body of water, was put on hold in 2010. The city purchased a gravel pit as a possible alternative to a second lake, and the agency advised city leaders to explore that possibility.

"An alternative was identified and needed to be fully considered," said Donna Jones, chief of the regulatory branch for Rock Island District of the Army Corps of Engineers. "They may or may not be part of the solution."

The Rock Island District first received a permit application from Springfield on Aug. 1, 1989. The city will need to update its environmental impact statement, noting the current conditions on the land and what effects building the lake would have, before it can get moving again.

Meckes and Langfelder have slightly different takes on why the project that's been on the table for decades still lacks the necessary permits.

Some of the project's opponents have insisted that it's because the scientific need for a backup water supply hasn't been demonstrated. Some have suggested it's because Springfield city leaders have wavered on Hunter Lake over the years, pursuing alternatives and failing to send a strong message to the agencies that if the city gets its permits, Hunter Lake will indeed be built.

Meckes thinks the Army Corps of Engineers would have approved a permit for the lake in the past and that the EPA permit was the issue because of unresolved issues related to rerouting sewage effluent from treatment plants in Pawnee, Divernon and Virden. He believes there are now solutions, he said.

Langfelder, meanwhile, thinks the changing mayoral administrations have affected the status because some have prioritized the second lake more than others, and he suggested that past city councils have lacked the "tenacity to strongly move forward with Hunter Lake."

"They might not see it as a priority at that point in time; they might want to see other studies," Langfelder said. "But in my estimation, that's why it's languished so long."

Jones said earlier this month that she'd heard about the city's recently passed resolution but hasn't received anything from the city.

"Until I actually see some physical evidence on my desk that they really want to pursue this, it's hearsay as far as I'm concerned," she said.

Jones generally would expect the Army Corps to issue a decision on a project within 120 days of receiving a complete application, but given the scope and complexity of the Hunter Lake proposal, she predicts it would take longer.

Since the city's original environmental impact study was done years ago, it has acquired more land for the project, and the land uses have changed. In a supplemental environmental impact statement, the city must identify the current conditions and what resources are at risk by building the lake, Jones said.

For the Army Corps to proceed, it needs a new application from the city and to go through a full review. Updating the environmental impact statement "is not going to be a cheap proposal," Jones said, adding that the city will need to pick up the tab. The most recent estimate put the cost at $400,000.

"Somebody has to come up with the money, and in the current political atmosphere that we're in, even our state doesn't have a budget," Jones said.

Some city officials viewed the partnership with the state Department of Natural Resources as a game changer for the Hunter Lake proposal, and Langfelder thinks the recreational opportunities could eventually become a regional draw for hunters, anglers and other outdoor enthusiasts.

Lake McIntosh

While similar in some respects, the circumstances surrounding the approval and construction of Lake McIntosh in Georgia differ from Hunter Lake. Lake McIntosh serves as part of the drinking water supply for Fayette County and is one of three reservoirs constructed for that purpose in the past few decades, said David Jaeger of Mallett Consulting Inc., the engineer of record for the project.

Lake McIntosh was initially slated to become a private reservoir built by a development company until it became clear the lake would affect properties beyond what they owned, which stalled the project.

Fayette County officials in the late 1970s began exploring sites for drinking water reservoirs. At that time, the county had a pumping station on nearby Lake Peachtree, about 30 miles southwest of Atlanta, but not its own designated reservoir, Jaeger said.

The Army Corps and the Georgia Department of Natural Resources strongly recommended that the county look at alternate sites for a reservoir because of a greater potential environmental impact on streams and wetlands at the Lake McIntosh site. Lake McIntosh went on the back burner for a number of years, but like the city of Springfield, Fayette County continued to buy up land intended to house Lake McIntosh.

Fayette County, in the meantime, finished construction on two other reservoirs: Lake Kedron in the 1980s and Lake Horton in the 1990s. At that time, the suburban Atlanta area was seeing rapid population increases, growing at a rate much higher than what Springfield has seen since Hunter Lake discussions began.

Fayette County officials had a renewed interest in the Lake McIntosh project in 1997 and started pursuing the necessary permits, which took a decade, Jaeger said.

The permits from other agencies had to be in place before the Army Corps would sign off on its permit, which it did in 2007, he said.

CWLP needs three major permits from the Army Corps, the Illinois EPA and the state Department of Natural Resources, as well as some other minor permits, Meckes said.

The Lake McIntosh design process took about a year, another year was dedicated to required procedures under the Georgia Dam Safety Program, and then they went out for bid on the process. Construction itself cost about $8.3 million and took about two years, Jaeger said.

The $24 million cost of building Lake McIntosh was substantially lower than the expected price tag for Hunter Lake. About $16.5 million was funded by bond issue, coupled with a two-phased rate increase for water customers: A 10 percent hike went into effect in March 2009, and another 5 percent increase was levied the following year.

Construction on Lake McIntosh wrapped up in late 2012. An adjacent park boasts a playground, walking trails, restrooms and boat ramps.

During the time the Georgia reservoirs were approved and built, there was severe drought in the area that compromised local water supplies. The projects were talked about in advance, with years' worth of population projections built in.

Among the biggest factors playing into the time it took for Lake McIntosh to be approved were increasing restrictions placed on such projects and the fact that Fayette County had other options for places to build reservoirs than the Lake McIntosh land, where there were more potential environmental effects.

At 650 acres of surface area when full, Lake McIntosh is substantially smaller than the proposed Hunter Lake, which would be more than 3,000 acres. Lake Springfield's surface area covers 4,200 acres.

Jaeger said he isn't aware of much of any local political resistance to the projects.

"I think most of the elected officials recognize the need to stay ahead of water demands," he said.

'Inadequate system'

The Illinois State Water Survey in 1998 and 2011 called Lake Springfield an "inadequate system," which means there's a more than 50 percent chance it wouldn't be able to provide enough water to meet the current demand through a severe drought.

Hunter Lake opponents have questioned whether Lake Springfield is indeed inadequate. They have charged that water demand projections are overstated and have said the city should employ a fresh set of consultants to look at the data. They also believe demand can be managed by changing the rate structure.

Ward 7 Ald. Joe McMenamin, the only one of the city's 10 aldermen who voted against the ordinance endorsing the lake last month, said at the time that the city's supply might be inadequate "once every 100 years."

McMenamin thinks the city has more pressing concerns.

"We have existing obligations that need to take priority. We're under enforcement action on our sewers, and we haven't provided a revenue source for most of that work," McMenamin said. "We haven't resolved our electric division financial issues yet, and we haven't resolved our police and fire pension underfunding, and all of those take priority over an additional water source."

Several combined smaller initiatives, such as drawing water from gravel pits in the Sangamon River Valley, restructuring rates and offering incentives for using more efficient appliances, could meet the demand, he said.

Clark Bullard, an engineering professor at the University of Illinois who is originally from Springfield, said the city could follow the lead of municipalities that have raised the water price for the last 1,000 gallons used by customers and dropped the monthly base charge. That gives people an incentive to invest in water-saving devices, such as new toilets or drip irrigation systems.

Bullard, who is on the board of directors for the National Wildlife Federation, points to efforts by major Western metropolises such as Los Angeles and Seattle. They've seen large population growth in recent decades but have kept water usage flat, he said.

Bullard said that when he addressed Springfield aldermen before their vote last month, it was tough to get across a complicated rate restructuring process in a few minutes.

"There's not a lot of policy analysis available to them," he said of the aldermen, adding that he understands the desire to see a project through once time and money have been invested rather than re-evaluating and moving in a different direction.

But he noted that permitting agencies have continued sending CWLP back to the drawing board, and he thinks the population projections in the water demand analysis are overinflated. He said a number of smaller projects could combine to augment the city's water access, negating the need for a new lake.

"It's just a lack of imagination," Bullard said.

Thirsty power plant

A lack of drinking water isn't the only concern for CWLP during a drought. If Lake Springfield dips below a certain level, there wouldn't be enough water for the Dallman power plant to fully function.

CWLP's electric division draws about 9.3 million gallons of water per day. If lake levels were to drop by 12 feet, "they can't get water to the plants," said Meckes, the water division manager.

A drought of record could result in a six-month shutdown of the power plant, which would force the city to buy power from elsewhere. Because of the way the city's import capabilities are configured, some areas could be blacked out for months, resulting in public health and fire protection concerns, CWLP spokeswoman Amber Sabin said.

Lake Springfield went into the spring 15 years ago down nearly 6 feet, which was the most concerning time in recent history, but rain in May and June helped lake levels move in the opposite direction. The lake can handle a 12-month drought, but an 18-month or two-year drought could have dire consequences, Meckes said.

"We were nervous," he said. "If we would have had another summer like the summer before, the power plant would have been shut down."

Springfield experienced a 30-month drought in the 1950s, and the utility is pumping almost twice as much water today as it was 65 years ago. When Meckes hears from opponents who point out that a 100-year drought hasn't happened in the decades the city has been talking about Hunter Lake, he says the city can't wait for it to happen to pursue a backup water supply.

"My job as water division manager is to make sure the water division is in a place where it can provide water to the community for a long time," Meckes said. "I'm not looking at a year; I'm looking at 50 years. And I see this as the opportunity for the water department to set themselves up where they can provide water through any drought."

Langfelder said that with a two-lake water supply, the city could become more of a regional water supplier, especially in the event of a drought.

For years, alternatives for a backup water supply — in addition to the gravel pits — were considered, but outgoing CWLP chief utility engineer Eric Hobbie lobbied the city council in May to endorse Hunter Lake, calling it the most cost-effective option.

Studies also explored tapping into aquifers in the Havana lowlands or the Illinois River Valley and pumping the water miles to Springfield. Those options would both require constructing a system of tanks, pump stations and dozens of miles of water mains, and the price tag for the Illinois River Valley option would have been $150 million to $200 million.

The Havana lowlands option would have cost less — between $122 million and $183 million — but still more than Hunter Lake.

Growing price tag

Planning for a second lake began 50 years ago, and last month's city council vote was one of at least three backing Hunter Lake that's passed in that time. A 1988 ordinance, very similar to the recent measure, was approved unanimously. Langfelder's father, Ossie, was mayor at the time.

If and when the required permits come through, Jim Langfelder plans on pursuing the lake "full steam ahead."

Cost is a major factor, and as past city leaders have put off pursuing Hunter Lake, the figure has risen. The city has already spent roughly $26 million on the endeavor and owns roughly 7,000 acres meant for the lake.

Most recent figures peg the cost from this point at $108 million. The cost has continued to grow steadily as construction and labor prices have gone up. A cost estimate in 2003 was $64.2 million, and the estimate grew $12.5 million in two years, to $76.7 million in 2005. Those figures don't include what the city has already spent on land.

When city officials first started talking about Hunter Lake, the cost estimates were much lower, but many of the environmental regulations the utility must comply with today weren't yet in place, and environmental impact statements and mitigation requirements such as sewer location weren't yet mandated, Sabin said.

Water rates for CWLP customers could rise upwards of 50 percent as a result. The monthly residential rate, based on a 5/8-inch meter, is $28. With a 50 percent hike, that would rise to $42, which puts would put the capital city's rates higher than Rockford's and Jacksonville's. But the rate would still be lower than Chatham, Bloomington, Peoria, Champaign, Decatur, Lincoln and several other Illinois cities.

Last month's city council endorsement won't be the only action it takes on Hunter Lake — aldermen will eventually need to OK a financing plan, too. Langfelder said he didn't want the council to have that discussion at the same time as it was deciding whether to pursue the permits.

"What we're trying to do with Lake II is for the long-term future of our community. That's the bottom line," Langfelder said. "Lake II provides us the best opportunity."

Information

Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
The State Journal-Register ~ Street address: One Copley Plaza (corner of Ninth Street and Capitol Avenue), Springfield, ILMailing address: The State Journal-Register, P.O. Box 219, Springfield, IL 62705-0219 ~ Privacy Policy ~ Terms Of Service